Luna Journey

To The Moon | HODLER | #XRPARMY | #crypto #doglover

[Old Salty Marine @BamaSaltyMarine]

We constantly hear about social security running out of money.

Why don't we ever hear about welfare running out of money?

[Luna Journey @LunaAlert]

@BCBacker @96Citadeldawg

[Luna Journey @LunaAlert]

@Stephen19718352 So true. I wish somebody told me earlier in life.

[illuminatibot @iluminatibot]

You are not allowed to notice that every western country opened its borders at the same time, pushed the same ideology at the same time and is experiencing the same demographic shift at the same time.

Just a coincidence. Move on.

[Old Salty Marine @BamaSaltyMarine]

HISTORY LESSON ON YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY CARD:
Just in case some of you young whippersnappers (& some older ones) didn’t know this. It’s easy to check out, if you don’t believe it. Be sure and show it to your family and friends. They need a little history lesson on what’s what and it doesn’t matter whether you are Democrat or Republican. Facts are FACTS.

Up until the 1980's, Social Security cards expressly stated the number and card were not to be used for identification purposes.
Since nearly everyone in the United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the "NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION" message was removed.

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. His promises are in black, with updates in brackets.

1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary [No longer voluntary],

2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program [Now 7.65% on the first $90,000, and 15% on the first $90,000 if you’re self-employed],

3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year [No longer tax deductible]

4.) That the money the participants put into the independent ‘Trust Fund’ rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program [Under Johnson the money was moved to the General Fund and spent]

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income [Under Clinton & Gore up to 85% of your Social Security can be taxed].

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month — and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to ‘put away’ — you may be interested in the following.

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent ‘Trust Fund’ and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the ‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

AND MY FAVORITE:

Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: That’s right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments!

The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!

Now, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!

If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe changes will evolve. Maybe not, though.

Some Democrats are awfully sure of what isn’t so but it’s worth a try.

How many people can YOU send this to?

[Luna Journey @LunaAlert]

@edgaralandough Made this. Very good. I'm not a big fan of wraps though. Next time I'm going to toast an organic sourdough english muffin. 😋

[Whiplash437 @MrWhiplash_]

🚨I’m still trying to process what just happened.

The highest ranking US intelligence official, just released smoking gun docs proving that Obama and his underlings committed treason/sedition.

Meaning Trump was right about everything, the news is fake, and the Deep State is real.

Meaning that all of us “conspiracy theorists” were right about the conspiracy against Trump… it wasn’t a theory.

Meaning the shadow war is real, and all our efforts over the last 10 years were not part of a “LARP”.

Meaning that we are not crazy. We were right.

It was all real.

FOLLOW ME THE NEXT DROP WILL BE SHOCKING

[Luna Journey @LunaAlert]

@WallStreetMav and rape & pillage

[Banxchange @BanXchange]

WE ARE EXCITED TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH UPHOLD (@UpholdInc) , A LEADER IN SUPPORTING AND EXPANDING XRP LEDGER INFRASTRUCTURE AND ADOPTION.

We anticipate receiving confirmation regarding the initial review process within the next 30 days.

Banx Network is proud to be building one of the largest decentralized media ecosystems powered by BXE payments on the XRP Ledger. Today, our network includes more than 502 journalists and over 55,000 publications, while our iOS application has surpassed 1,000 downloads and continues to grow rapidly.

We look forward to sharing additional updates as we continue expanding decentralized media powered by the XRP Ledger.

For the latest visit https://t.co/n3XQ4yA5M4

[Mila Joy @Milajoy]

After working for 50 years, the average Social Security recipient gets $1800/month.

After being in America for 50 minutes, the average illegal “refugee” gets $3874/month.

And red or blue, that should PISS EVERYONE OFF.

[Luna Journey @LunaAlert]

@XRPee3 Hbar anyone? 🙂

[End Wokeness @EndWokeness]

Modern feminism in a single video…

[Luna Journey @LunaAlert]

@XRPee3 Not when I think back to fall of 2020 and they were both in the 20 cent range. I swapped all my xlm for XRP.

[Luna Journey @LunaAlert]

@BuzzPatterson #1

[Luna Journey @LunaAlert]

@DefLeppard Def Leppard Friday at work. Jammin in the office today! 😊

[Simone Derayeh @simonederayeh]

The intellectual confusion surrounding the normalization of the hijab becomes even more glaring when it extends into modern progressive politics, corporate advertising, and mainstream media culture. This week, images circulated of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @AOC appearing publicly in New York wearing a hijab while attending events connected to Muslim community. To many US progressives, this is framed as solidarity, inclusivity, or cultural sensitivity. But what is astonishing is how little understanding exists about what the hijab actually represents within the legal and theological framework from which it emerged.

Politicians like AOC routinely present themselves as opponents of patriarchy, defenders of women’s autonomy, and critics of systems that impose unequal expectations on women. Yet when they symbolically adopt garments rooted in religious modesty doctrines that explicitly regulate female behavior and visibility, they become representatives of the very patriarchal systems they claim to oppose. The contradiction is extraordinary.

#Hijab did not emerge historically as a feminist statement. It emerged from an ideology that believes women are less than complete human and must therefore dress differently from men for reasons of morality, temptation, and social order. In most Islamic societies governed partially or fully through sharia-based norms, the expectation is not reciprocal. Men are not subjected to equivalent bodily concealment standards, morality patrols, or state-enforced modesty regulations. The burden falls overwhelmingly on women. That is the definition of institutionalized gender inequality. Additionally, this enforcement is not limited to government bodies. Many Muslim women living in the west abide by hijab regulations in fear of physical abuse from their father, brothers, uncles or any other man in their family who buy tradition and ideology has power over decisions made for their lives.

Yet despite this reality, Western media and corporate culture increasingly romanticize the hijab as a symbol of empowerment, modernity, and female liberation. One of the clearest recent examples was the widespread celebration of Ameera Hashwi becoming the first hijabi “Miss Wayne County” contestant on the path toward the Miss America system. Rather than critically examining the contradiction between beauty pageants and religious modesty doctrines rooted in female concealment, media coverage overwhelmingly framed the moment as historic progress and inclusion.

The symbolism matters. Beauty pageants historically evolved around visibility, glamour, presentation, and public femininity. The modern effort to merge these institutions with religious modesty codes creates a contradiction that much of the media refuses to examine honestly. Instead, the narrative is flattened into simplistic slogans about “representation” and “breaking barriers,” while the patriarchal origins of the garment itself are carefully ignored. Feminist Activist, in fact, strongly opposed the bikini section of Miss America pageant, Express expressing that it was objectifying women. Where is women attending? These pageants were dressing in those bikinis 100% by their own choice..Hijab in the other hand in most cases for women wearing it is not a choice.

This broader trend extends far beyond pageantry. Western corporations now disproportionately feature hijab-wearing women in advertising campaigns in ways that vastly exceed their demographic representation in society. Companies such as Nike aggressively marketed products like the “Pro Hijab,” presenting the garment not as a symbol tied to centuries of patriarchal, religious enforcement, but as an aspirational lifestyle accessory associated with empowerment . Likewise, airlines such as United Airlines and numerous fashion brands have prominently featured hijab imagery in
1/2

[Masih Alinejad 🏳️ @AlinejadMasih]

Hello @AOC, while you smiled in a hijab at a New York event, I was in Federal Court facing the 4th hitman hired by the Islamic Republic to assassinate me, for campaigning for Iranian women to have the same freedom you performed for a photo op. Will you come to court with me in August when I face the 5th hitman? Or does solidarity only work when it doesn't offend the Islamic regime?

You wore hijab voluntarily in New York. Women are killed in Iran for taking it off.

You are the very woman who, at every opportunity, protests against violence against women, decries gender segregation, and champions "inclusion." Yet here you stand, smiling and wearing a hijab, at an event in New York, in the heart of the West, where men and women are strictly separated. To me and millions of Iranian women, this does not look like a choice. It is no longer "My body, my choice," but rather "My body for votes."

They who claim to fight for women's self-determination in the name of feminism voluntarily embrace an ideology that mandates our women cover their hair simply because they are women. They enjoy the prosperity, freedom, and privileges of the Western world, where they may live as autonomous individuals , yet they simultaneously accept that other women should not be afforded the same rights.

#LetUsTalk

[Luna Journey @LunaAlert]

@EndWokeness @RubinReport What a dumb b

[Luna Journey @LunaAlert]

@MrPitbull07 How cute! 😅

[Luna Journey @LunaAlert]

@popparoni @JebraFaushay 😂 My dad did this! We actually had a payphone downstairs where our bedrooms were! 🤣🤣🤣